B - 2
B - 2
B - 2
Abstract
In this paper we investigate the existence and uniqueness of global solutions, and
a rate stability for the energy related with a Cauchy problem to the viscous Burgers
equation in unbounded domain R (0, ). Some aspects associated with a Cauchy
problem are presented in order to employ the approximations of Faedo-Galerkin in
whole real line R. This becomes possible due to the introduction of weight Sobolev
spaces which allow us to use arguments of compactness in the Sobolev spaces.
Key words: Unbounded domain, global solvability, uniqueness, a rate decay estimate
for the energy.
ut + uux uxx = 0
established in R (0, T ), for an arbitrary T > 0. More precisely, we consider the real
valued function u = u(x, t) defined for all (x, t) R (0, T ) which is the solution of the
Cauchy problem
(
ut + uux uxx = 0 in R (0, T ),
(1.1)
u(x, 0) = u0 (x) in R.
1
Universidade Federal Fluminense, IM, RJ, Brasil
2
Corresponding author: [email protected]
3
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, IM, RJ, Brasil, [email protected]
respectively. The vector spaces L2 (K) and Hm (K) are Hilbert spaces with the above
inner products. By D(R) it denotes the class of C functions in R with compact
support and convergence in the Laurent Schwartz sense, see [16].
We will also use the functional structure of the spaces Lp (0, T ; H) with 1 p ,
where H is one of the spaces: L2 (K) or Hm (K).
Some properties of the spaces L2 (K) and Hm (K) as the compactness of the inclu-
sion Hm (K) L2 (K) and Poincare inequality with the weight (1.2) has been proven
in Escobedo-Kavian [11]. Results on compactness of space of spherically symmetric
functions that vanishes at infinity were proven by Strauss [18]. In this direction one
can see some results in Kurtz [12].
The method used to prove the existence of solutions for the Cauchy problem (1.1)
is to transform it to another equivalent one proposed in the suitable functional spaces
by using a change of variables defined by
x
z(y, s) = (t + 1)1/2 u(x, t) where y = and s = ln(t + 1). (1.3)
(t + 1)1/2
1 z y z s
ut = (t + 1)3/2 z + (t + 1)1/2 +
2 y t s t
z yz
y
= (t + 1)3/2 + zs
z yz 2 2
y
= e3s/2 + zs .
2 2
For use later and a better understanding we will modify the equation (1.4) as follows:
yy
one defines the operator L : H2 (K) R by 7 L = yy 2 , which satisfies:
1
L = (Ky )y and (L, ) = (y , y ) = ((, ))2 (1.6)
K
for all H2 (K) and H1 (K). Therefore, from (1.4), (1.5) and (1.6)1 the Cauchy
problem (1.1) is equivalent by to
zs + Lz z + zzy = 0 in R (0, S),
2 (1.7)
z(y, 0) = u0 (y) in R.
The purpose of this work is: in Section 2, we investigate the existence of global weak
solutions of (1.1), its uniqueness and as well as analysis of the decay of these solutions.
In Section 3 we establish the same properties of Section 2 for the strong solutions. In
Section 4, we study the regularity of the strong solutions.
2 Weak Solution
Setting the initial data u0 L2 (K) we are able to show that the Cauchy problem
(1.1) has a unique global weak solution u = u(x, t) defined in R(0, ) with real values
and the energy associated with this solution is asymptotically stable.
The concept of the solutions for (1.1) is established in the following sense
for all v H 1 (R) and for all D(0, T ). Moreover, u satisfies the initial condition
The existence of solution of (1.1) in the precedent sense is guaranteed by the fol-
lowing theorem
Theorem 2.1. Suppose u0 L2 (K), then there exists a unique global solution u of
(1.1) in the sense of Definition 2.1. Moreover, energy E(t) = 12 |u(t)|2 associated with
this solution satisfies
The following proposition, whose proof has have been done in Escobedo & Kavian
[11], will be useful throughout this paper.
As the two Cauchy problems (1.1) and (1.7) are equivalent the Definition 2.1 and
Theorem 2.1 are also equivalent to Definition 2.2 and Theorem 2.2.
for all v H1 (K) and for all D(0, S). Moreover, z satisfies the initial condition
The existence of solutions for system (1.7) will be shown by means of Faedo-Galerkin
method. In fact, as L2 (K) is a separable Hilbert space there exists a orthogonal hilber-
tian basis (j )jN of L2 (K). Moreover, since H1 (K) L2 (K) is compactly imbedding
there exist j solutions of the spectral problem associated with the operator L in H1 (K).
This means that
Since Theorems 2.1 and 2.2 are equivalent, it suffices to prove the Theorem 2.2.
Before this, we first introduce the following property, which will be useful later:
Proof - As
Z Z h 2 i
1/2 2 |y|
K v |v(y)|2R Kdy + |v(y)|2R K + 2|vy (y)|2R K dy,
H 1 (R) R R 8
then from Proposition 2.1 one has
Z Z
1/2 2
K v 1 |v(y)|R Kdy + 4 |vy (y)|2R Kdy 4kvk21 .
2
H (R) R R
As the continuous immersion H 1 (R) L (R) holds, we have K 1/2 v L (R) and
there exists C > 0 such that K 1/2 v L (R) C K 1/2 v H 1 (R) . This proves the statement
(a). As K 1/2 1, then from (a) one gets (b). The statement (c) is an immediate
consequence from Proposition 2.1-item (5). Notice that for all v H2 (K) one has
(vy , vy ) = (Lv, v) . From this and Proposition 2.1-item (5) one gets (d). Finally, let
v H2 (K) and Lv = f with f L2 (K). Defining w = K 1/2 v one can write
1 y2
wyy = + w K 1/2 Lv.
4 16
From this, Proposition 2.1-item (5) and Proposition 2.2-item (c), one has
Z h i
1 y4 y2 1 y2
|wyy |2R + |w|2R + |w|2R + |w|2R + |wy |2R + |wy |2R dy =
R 16 256 32 2 8
Z h i
1 3
K|Lv|R ywy w dy |Lv|.
R 4 2
On the other hand, one has
h i
|vyy |2R C2 |w|2R + y 2 |w|2R + y 4 |w|2R + y 2 |wy |2R + |wyy |2R K 1 .
From these two above inequalities, Proposition 2.1-item (5) and (d) one obtains (e)
for all belong to VN . The System (2.6) has local solution z N in 0 s < sN , see for
instance, Coddington-Levinson [7]. The estimates to be proven later allow us to extend
the solutions z N to whole interval [0, S[ for all S > 0 and to obtain subsequences that
converge, in convenient spaces, to the solution of (1.7) in the sense of Definition 2.2.
1 N 1 N
1X
|zy (s)|2 |z N (s)|2 = (g1N (s))2 (1 1) + (gjN (s))2 (j 1) .
2 2 2
j=2
From Proposition 2.1-item (4) the second statement in (2.9) is obvious. Therefore, it
suffices to prove that g1N (s) = 0 for all s and N. In fact, first, note that
X
N
g1N (s) = gjN (s)j , 1 = (zN (s), 1 ) .
j=1
1 1
|z N (s)| < for all 0 s < s and |z N (s )| = .
4 3C1 4 3C1
|z N (s )| < 1/4 3C1 .
This contradicts z N (s ) = 1/4 3C1 . Thus, (2.12) it is true. Therefore, integrating
(2.11) from 0 to s and by using (2.4) and (2.6)2 , it yields
Z s
N 1 2 1
|z (s)| + |zyN ( )|2 d |z0 |2 . (2.13)
2 0 4 3C1
N
X
PN : L2 (K) VN defined by v 7 PN (v) = (v, i )i .
i=1
N
X N
X N N
1X N X
(zsN , i )i + N
(Lz , i )i (z , i )i + (z N (s)zyN (s), i )i = 0.
2
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
1
PN zsN + PN Lz N PN z N + PN z N (s)zyN (s) = 0.
2
1
zsN = Lz N + z N PN z N (s)zyN (s) . (2.14)
2
As the proof of the three identities (2.15), (2.16) and (2.17) are similar, we will just
make the last one. In fact,
PN z N (s)zyN (s) 1
[H (K)]
= sup PN z N (s)zyN (s) , v [H 1 (K)] H 1 (K)
vH1 (K) R
||v||1
= sup PN z N (s)zyN (s) , v L2 (K)
vH1 (K) R
||v||1
N
= sup z (s)zyN (s), PN v L2 (K)
vH1 (K) R
||v||1
N N
C1 sup z (s) zy (s) k(PN v)k 1
H (K) .
vH1 (K)
||v||1
The limit in the approximate problem (2.6): By Estimates 1 and 2, more pre-
cisely, from (2.13) and (2.18) we can extract subsequences of (z N ), which one will
denote by (z N ), and a function z : R (0, S) R satisfying
zN z weak star in L 0, S; L2 (K) ,
zN z weak in L2 0, S; H1 (K) , (2.19)
zsN zs weak in L2 0, S; H1 (K) .
From these convergence we are able to pass to the limits in the linear terms of (2.6). The
nonlinear term needs careful analysis. In fact, from (2.19)1, 3 and Aubins compactness
result, see Aubin [1], Browder [4], Lions [15] or Lions [14], we can extract a subsequences
of (z N ), which one will denote by (z N ), such that
On the other hand, for all (x, s) = v(x)(s) with v H1 (K) and D(0, S) we have
Z S Z S
N N
z (s)zy (s), (s) ds = zyN , z N ds (2.21)
0 0
Z S Z S
= zyN , z N z ds + zyN , z ds.
0 0
The second integral also converges because from (2.19)2 we have, in particular, that
zyN zy weak in L2 0, S; L2 (K)
and because z L2 0, S; L2 (K) . Therefore, we have
Z S Z S
zyN (s), z(s)(s) ds (zy (s), z(s)(s)) ds as N .
0 0
Uniqueness of solutions of (1.7): The global weak solutions of the initial value
problem (1.7) is unique for all s [0, S], S > 0. In fact, from (2.19)1 and (2.19)3 the
duality hzs , zi[H1 (K)] H1 (K) makes sense. Thus, suppose z and zb are two solutions of
(1.7) and let = z zb, then satisfies
s + L = (zzy zb zby ) , (0) = 0. (2.22)
2
Taking the duality paring on the both sides of (2.22)1 with we obtain
1 d 1
|(s)|2 + |y (s)|2 = |(s)|2 (z(s)y (s), (s)) (b
zy (s)(s), (s)) . (2.23)
2 ds 2
1 2
Asymptotic behavior: The asymptotic behavior, as s , of E(s) = 2 |z(s)|
given by the unique solution of the Cauchy problem (1.7) is established as a consequence
of inequality (2.11). In fact, from (2.11), (2.12) and Banach-Steinhauss theorem we get
that the limit function z defined by (2.19) satisfies the inequality
1 d 1
|z(s)|2 + |zy (s)|2 0.
2 ds 4
d 1
|z(s)|2 + |z(s)|2 0.
ds 4
Remark 2.1. The inequality (2.2) is a consequence of (2.5). In fact, from (1.3) we
obtain |z(s)|2 = (t + 1)1/2 |u(t)|2 and |z0 |2 = |u0 |2 . Moreover, as s = ln(t + 1), then
exp[s/4] = (t + 1)1/4 . Therefore, from (2.5) we have
1
|u(t)|2 = |z(s)|2 |u0 |2 (t + 1)3/4
t+1
Definition 3.1. A global strong solution for the initial value problem (1.1) is a real
valued function u = u(x, t) defined in R (0, T ) for an arbitrary T > 0, such that
u L 2 2 1
loc (0, ; H (R)), ut Lloc (0, ; H (R)),
Z T Z Z TZ Z TZ
ut dxdt + uux dxdt + ux x dxdt = 0, (3.1)
0 R 0 R 0 R
for all L2 0, T ; H 1 (R) . Moreover, u satisfies the initial condition
The existence of solution of (1.1) in the precedent sense is guaranteed by the fol-
lowing theorem.
Theorem 3.1. Suppose u0 H1 (K), then there exists a unique global solution u of
(1.1) in the sense of Definition 3.1. Moreover, energy E(t) = 12 |u(t)|2 associated with
this solution satisfies
As the Cauchy problems (1.1) and (1.7) are equivalent, the Definition 3.1 and The-
orem 3.1 are also equivalent to Definition 3.2 and Theorem 3.2.
Definition 3.2. A global strong solution of the initial-boundary value problem (1.7) is
a real valued function z = z(y, s) defined in R (0, S) for arbitrary S > 0, such that
z L 2 2 1
loc (0, ; H (K)), zs Lloc (0, ; H (K)) for S > 0,
Z SZ Z SZ
zs Kdyds + LzKdyds+ (3.2)
0 R 0 R
Z S Z Z S Z
1
zKdyds + zzy Kdyds = 0,
2 0 R 0 R
for all L2 0, S; H1 (K) . Moreover, z satisfies the initial condition
Since Theorems 3.1 and 3.2 are equivalent it is suffices to prove Theorem 3.2.
1 d N
|z (s)|2 + |Lz N (s)|2
2 ds y
1 N 1 Z
|z (s)| + |Lz (s)| + z N (s)zyN (s)Lz N (s)Kdy .
2 N 2
8 2 R R
Next, we will find the upper bound of the last term on the right-hand side of the above
inequality. In fact, by using Holder inequality, Proposition 2.2-items (b), (c) and (d)
we can write
Z 2
z N (s)zyN (s)Lz N (s)Kdy C1 6 zyN (s) Lz N (s) .
R R
1 N
|Lz (s)|2 |z N (s)|2 0 for all N N. (3.4)
8
1 N 1 N
2 1X
2 N 2 2
|Lz (s)| |z (s)| = (g1N (s)) 1 1 + (gjN (s))2 2j 1 .
8 8 8
j=2
From this we obtain (3.4), see Estimate 1. Since (3.4) is true, the inequality (3.3) is
reduced to
1 d N 1 1
|zy (s)|2 + |Lz N (s)|2 + |Lz N (s)|2 6C1 |zyN (s)| 0. (3.5)
2 ds 8 4
Next, proceeding as (2.12) we will prove that
|zyN (s)| < 1/4 6C1 for all s 0. (3.6)
Theorem 4.1. Let z = z(y, s) be a strong solution of problem (1.7), which is guaran-
teed by Theorem 3.2, then z C 0 [0, T ]; H1 (K) .
Proof: We will show that z is the limit of a Cauchy sequence. In fact, suppose
M, N N fixed with N > M and z N , z M are two solutions of (1.7). Thus, v N =
z N z M satisfies
1
vsN (s) + Lv N (s) v N (s) = PM z M (s)zyM (s) PN z N (s)zyN (s) in L2 (K).
2
Therefore, from (2.6), one has that
vsN (s), + Lv N (s), 1/2 v N (s), =
(4.1)
PM z M (s)zyM (s) PN z N (s)zyN (s) , , ,
for all V N L2 (K), where PN , PM are projection operators defined in L2 (K) with
values in V N , V M respectively.
Z S
|PN (z(s)zy (s)) PM (z(s)zy (s))|2 ds 0 as N . (4.3)
0
In fact, as zzy L2 0, S; L2 (K) , then z(s)zy (s) L2 (K) a. e. in [0, S]. Therefore,
PN (z(s)zy (s)) z(s)zy (s) in a. e. in [0, S] as N . That is,
|PN (z(s)zy (s)) z(s)zy (s)| 2 |z(s)zy (s)| and |z(s)zy (s)| L2 (0, S).
Thus, applying Lebesgues dominated convergence theorem, it yields
Z S
|PN (z(s)zy (s)) z(s)zy (s)|2 ds 0 as N .
0
In other words
PN (zzy ) zzy in L2 0, S; L2 (K) as N .
Therefore, (PN (zzy ))N N is a Cauchy sequence in L2 0, S; L2 (K) . Hence we have
that (4.3) is true
On the other hand, from (4.2) and Granwall inequality one gets
Z S
1 N 2 N 2
vy (s) ds
v (s) +
2 0
h 1 2 Z S
v0N + z N (s)zyN (s) z(s)zy (s)2 ds+
2 0
Z S
|PN (z(s)zy (s)) PM (z(s)zy (s))|2 ds+
Z S 0
i
z(s)zy (s) z M (s)zyM (s)2 ds exp {(5/4)S} .
0
From this, hypothesis on the initial data, (3.10) and (4.3) one gets that z N N N
is a
Cauchy sequence in C 0 0, S; L2 (K) .
To obtain the desired regularity one needs one more estimate as follows.
1 d N 2 N 2 1 N 2
vy (s) + Lv (s) vy (s)
2 ds
2
N N
PN z (s)zy (s) z(s)zy (s) + PN (z(s)zy (s))
PM (z(s)zy (s)) + PM z(s)zy (s) z M (s)zyM (s) Lv N (s)
N
z (s)zyN (s) z(s)zy (s)2 + |PN (z(s)zy (s)) PM (z(s)zy (s))|2 +
z(s)zy (s) z M (s)zyM (s)2 + 3 Lv N (s)2 .
4
Integrating from 0 to S and using Granwall inequality, one gets
Z S
1 N 2 N 2
Lv (s) ds
vy (s) + y
2 0
h 1 2 Z S
N
v0y + z N (s)zyN (s) z(s)zy (s)2 ds+
2 0
Z S
|PN (z(s)zy (s)) PM (z(s)zy (s))|2 ds+
Z S 0
i
z(s)zy (s) z M (s)z M (s)2 ds exp {(5/4)S} .
y
0
From this, hypothesis on the initial data, (3.10) and (4.3) one gets that z N N N is
a Cauchy sequence in C 0 0, S; H1 (K) . Thus, we have the desired regularity. And
therefore the proof of Theorem 4.1 is ended
References
[1] Aubin, J. P., Un theoreme de compacite, C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris, 256 (1963), pp.
50425044.
[2] Bateman, H., Some recent researches on the motion of fluids, Mon. Water Rev.,
43 (1915), pp. 163170.
[3] Brezis, H., Analyse Fonctionelle (Theorie et Applications), Dunod, Paris (1999).
[5] Burgers, J. M., Application of a model system to illustrate some points of the
statistical theory of free turbulence, Proc. Acad. Sci. Amsterdam, 43 (1940), pp.
212.
[6] Burgers, J. M., A mathematical model illustrating the theory of turbulence), Adv.
App. Mech., Ed. R. V. Mises and T. V. Karman, 1 (1948), pp. 171199.
[7] Coddington, R. E. & Levinson, N., Theory of ordinary differential equations, Mac-
Graw Hill, N.Y. 1955.
[8] Courant, R. & Friedrichs, K. O., Supersonic flow and shock waves Interscience,
New York, 1948.
[9] Courant, R. & Hilbert, D., Methods of mathematical physics, vol. II, Interscience,
New York, 1962.
[10] Hopf, E., The partial differential equation ut + uux = uxx , Comm. Pure Appl.
Math., 3 (1950), pp. 201230.
[11] Escobedo, M. & Kavian, O., Variational problems related to self-similar solutions
of the heat equation, Nonlinear Analysis, TMA, Vol. 11, No. 10 (1987), pp. 1103
1133.
[12] Kurtz, J. C., Weighted Sobolev spaces with applications to singular nonlinear bound-
ary value problems, J. Diff. Equations, 49, (1983), pp. 105123.
[13] Lax, P., Hyperbolic systems of conservation laws and the mathematical theory of
shock waves, SIAM - Regional conference series in applied mathematics, No. 11,
pp. 147, (1972).
[14] Lions, J. L., Problemes aux limites dans les equations aux derivees partielles, Oeu-
vres Choisies de Jacques Louis Lions, Vol. I, EDP Sciences Ed. Paris, 2003.
[15] Lions, J. L., Quelques methodes de resolution des problemes aux limites non lin-
eaires, Dunod, Paris (1969).
[18] Strauss, W. A., Existence of solitary waves in higher dimensions, Communs Math.
Phys., 55, (1977), pp. 149162.